Re: Object method documentation.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 23:21, Eddie Drapkin <oorza2k5@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Hannes Magnusson > <hannes.magnusson@gmail.com> wrote: >> I.. don't know. >> I look at the class reference page when I want quickly see the access >> modifiers of the methods. >> And, its documented on the method pages.. >> >> I don't really see the need to parse the access modifiers and then >> manipulating all <methodname>, <xref>, <refname>, and wherever it may >> be mentioned. >> >> Having a strict markup convention for this is going to be biatch to >> enforce, and eventually leading to confusion. >> >> >> I'm sure we can implement this in PhD though if you all feel strongly about it. >> >> -Hannes >> > > Having not looked a lot at the source of PhD, how difficult would this > be to implement?  I think it should just be a check if there's a > <modifier>static</modifier> child of each <methodsynopsis>, shouldn't > it? Not exactly. This has to be done in the indexerer so <xref linkend="datetime.createfromformat" /> will generate the correct text. Also, it would have to check *all* <function> and <methodname>, look it up in the index, and fetch the "preferred" format and magically replace the content. Same with <refname>, and all TOCs linking to it, will have to be checked against the index to print the correct format. I can't think of any other edge cases at the moment, but this as to be consistent throughout every mention of every method, otherwise it just creates confusion for the end-user. Also, we still do have some <link linkend="classname.methodname">Classname::methodName</link> around, which would have to be found and fixed. -Hannes